bryan.sant at gmail.com
Tue Feb 13 16:59:11 MST 2007
On 2/13/07, Levi Pearson <levi at cold.org> wrote:
> You, an aggressive evangelizer?! No way!
> I don't think anyone here produces the sheer volume of language
> advocacy for a single language that you do, so you shouldn't be
> surprised if you get singled out for responses.
And though there is a fair amount of language trashing dished out to
everyone, no language receives more slander than Java on this list.
That's what you get when you're #1. As Bjarne Stroustrup said, "There
are just two kinds of languages: the ones everybody complains about
and the ones nobody uses." Rarely do I start a thread. I'm usually
cleaning up after some false, severely outdated, or otherwise slanted
comment about Java.
Some people knit or chew sunflower seeds as a past time. I defend
Java. It's relaxing.
> I'm aware of that, though I've heard that although it's an
> improvement, it still leaves some dynamic languages as second-class
> citizens. I'm afraid I don't remember the details, though. A little
> work on the Strongtalk VM (which was recently released under an open
> source license) would produce a much faster platform for dynamic
> languages than JVM would be even with JSR 292, but alas, few people
> seem to be both qualified and interested in hacking on it. Strongtalk
> was based on the same technology that HotSpot was, but extended
> further for support of Smalltalk, which is about as dynamic as a
> language can get.
Well, I'll be interested to see how things turn out. So far there
have been early reports of JRuby being twice as fast on the JVM than
Ruby C. I think speed and compatibility will be the motivator for
coming to the JVM, probably not ease of implementation.
More information about the PLUG